Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (0.53 seconds)

National Insurance Co Ltd vs Sri Thimmegowda @ Anil Kumar on 18 August, 2022

In another judgment in the case of Smt. Shivleela and Others vs. Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation reported in ILR 2003 KAR 3602, it was held that the deceased had not traveled on the roof top of the bus stealthily; that means, without knowledge of the driver/conductor of the bus and therefore, the driver and conductor knew very well that the deceased climbed roof top of the bus and was traveling. Therefore, it was held that the percentage of negligence contributed by the deceased and driver and conductor of the bus is in the ratio of 50:50.
Karnataka High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 0 - H Sanjeevkumar - Full Document

Bhuribai And Anr. vs Shyam Sunder And Ors. on 5 July, 2006

In reply Mr. S. Gajendragadkar, the learned counsel for the insurance company, respondent No. 3, submitted that it could be a case of contributory negligence and placed reliance on two decisions of the Division Bench of Karnataka High Court in the case of Shivleela v. Karnataka State Road Trans. Corporation , in which a passenger was travelling on rooftop of the Corporation bus and was hit by branches of a roadside tree resulting in his death. In that case Karnataka High Court has held that this is a case of contributory negligence of the deceased as well as the owner of the bus.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd vs Smt. Meena Devi And Others on 12 March, 2012

On the other hand, learned counsel for the claimants have relied upon number of judgments such as New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Shanti Bai (Smt.) and others (1995) 2 SCC 539, wherein the compensation has been ordered to be paid on account of death of the passenger on the roof top as well as Full Bench judgment of Jharkhand High Court in Girija Prasad Agrawal Vs. Parwati Devi and others 2005 (3) RCR (Civil) 702; the Divison Bench judgments of Karnataka High Court in Smt. Mayamma Vs. FAO No.1043 of 1991 5 Siddaiah and others 2003 (3) RCR (Civil) 50, New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Jayashree and others 2010 ACJ 871, Shivleela and others Vs. Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation 2004 ACJ 759; a Division Bench judgment of Gauhati High Court in Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Member, MACT, Kamrup and others 2005 ACJ 1353; the Single Bench judgments of Rajasthan High Court in Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation and another Vs. Jamal Deen and another 2007 ACJ 2732; Madhya Pradesh High Court in Sundarbai and another Vs. Laxminarayan and others 2007 ACJ 255; Allahabad High Court in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Hasina Begum and others 2011 ACJ 2156; Gujarat High Court in Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Gangaben Salambhai Nayak and others 2011 ACJ 288 as also of this Court reported as Vijay Singh Vs. Haryana Roadways and another 1990 ACJ 18 and Manjit Kaur and others Vs. Pepsu Road Transport Corporation and others 1990 ACJ 471.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 20 - Cited by 10 - H Gupta - Full Document

Managing Director, North West ... vs Guddappa Durgappa Ramannavar on 15 March, 2005

In somewhat similar circumstances, in the case of Shivleela v. Karnataka State Road Trans. Corporation , a Division Bench of this Court has apportioned the liability of the claimant and K.S.R.T.C. in the ratio of 50:50. Of course, in that case, the stand of the claimant, that on the direction of the conductor the claimant was travelling sitting on the top of the bus, was disbelieved by the Tribunal and also by this Court and held that the claimant failed to show that with permission or at the direction of the driver or conductor of the bus, he was travelling sitting on the top of the bus. But, keeping in mind that the driver and conductor of the vehicle are required to take care that no passenger travels sitting on the top of the bus, apportioned the liability to the extent of 50 per cent each, after observing thus:
Karnataka High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 1 - S B Majage - Full Document
1